Do you agree with Trump's Muslim ban?

It's not news that Muslims, since the start of the Trump and Clinton election campaigns, have been subjected to various forms of racism in American such as pulling off female hijabs and public scrutiny.

The ban itself is enough of a worry for some Muslims as it mirrors the United States actions during the Jewish Holocaust when refugees were banned from fleeing Nazi Germany. The executive action signed yesterday on Holocaust Remembrance Day is now being shown by the media as either an omen or a slap in the face to anyone who suffered during the Holocaust.

For those of you who are unaware of what the ban is, it means Muslims from seven countries, like Syria, would not be allowed to enter the US. If you are a Muslim immigrant with a legal green card, you cannot reenter the US for 90 days should you choose to leave. It doesn't matter if you are visiting family, attending a funeral, going on vacation, or even going on a business trip. Refugees cannot enter the United States for 120 days.

A Federal Judge has already interjected against the plan and several protests against it have erupted, more specifically the one in O'Hare airport. Even celebrities are speaking out such as Catfish's Nev Schulman, Alyssa Milano, Kerry Washington, Miley Cyrus, George Takei, Emmy Rossum and Debra Messing.

Most Helpful Guys

The Executive Order does not mention Islam, Muslims or any other specific religion. The media are in a full blown hysterical meltdown over this order and are purposely misreporting what it is and isn't. What they are not telling you is that as recently as 2011 President Obama suspended all refugee settlement in the United States from Iraq for a certain time period. Why did he do that? Because at least 2 of the refugees allowed into the country were found later to be fervent and ardent Islamic jihadists. There was no outcry when Obama took this action in an effort to protect the nation. The list of countries included in President Trump's order are countries that are already considered "countries of concern" when it comes to Islamic terrorism, and even the Obama administration considered them to be so. Although they are mostly Muslim countries, the vast majority of the Islamic world is not covered by Trump's order. The countries that are included are known hotbeds of Islamic radicalism and jihadist terror. Only 2 months age a Somalian refugee attempted to commit mass murder on the Ohio State University campus. Fortunately he "only" succeeded in seriously injuring 13 people before he was shot by a campus police officer. That is an example of why President Trump has issued this order: He wants there to be better vetting procedures when it comes to letting in people from this part of the world where so many in those countries hate America and are committed to the worldwide Holy Jihad against the infidels. And President Trump has a specific legal basis for issuing his order which the media is not reporting. In 1952 Congress passed a statute over President Truman's veto that granted to the president of the United States the authority to, at any time and in his discretion, suspend the entry of any persons or class of persons into the U. S. that would be detrimental to the interests of the country. That is still current law, and that law is cited in President Trump's executive order. This same law was invoked in 1979-1980 by President Carter to prevent the entry into the U. S. of Iranian nationals after the U. S. embassy was seized and Americans were held hostage inside for over a year.

It's NOT a Muslim ban -_- It's a 90 day ban to people from countries that are known for training terrorists. If it was a Muslim ban then countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, or Egypt would also be banned, but they're not, despite having more Muslims than the countries that were banned. Can you people please get your facts straight?

I agree with the temporary ban, because we can't just let anyone in. Europe should do the same. The point of this ban is to check everything out and figure out the best ways to let people in, in the safest way possible, without letting some crazy dude come in freely. This ban was also something Obama planned, he just never really had time to put it in practice, but all this was actually Obama's plan.

Oh, and by the way, were was the outrage when Obama banned people from Iraq in 2011?

If people had enough sense to just understand any word you just said! I never been Trump supporter. But when something "Makes sense" it makes sense. And i can't disagree ! Every decision he had made, he made me to have more faith on him.

@UnknownReflection Problem is people just read the headlines of sites like HuffPo or Buzzfeed who are clearly against Trump. And they also listen to celebrities (just look at the @asker mentioning that celebrities are against the ban, as if celebrities' opinions matter more for some reason).They would rather just listen/read what someone else has to say than actually reading the executive order and looking at exactly what it says.

i think that ban should be longer than just 90 days since Obama banned Iraqians for more time... also i think a Muslim ban would be better since it would allow arab Christians (who obviously are not threat for national security) to come in and flee from that region where they have been suffered a lot. around 100.000 christians died in middle east last year

@KnightCross 100,000 Christians died? How many of them by US bombings? 10 times more Muslims died in Iraq because G W Bush wanted to kill one despot brought to power by the CIA. And 500,000 children were starved in Iraq by our sanctions. You know, those WMD wich were never found...

Most Helpful Girls

Let me tell you something. The biggest terrorist importers of the world is Saudi Arabia, and then Qatar and Pakistan follow according to the statistics. However, they are not on the list. Is this a double list? Yes it is given the fact that dollar is backed by oil as an agreement with Saudis; and if it is not backed by dollar, then dollar would be not as competitive currency as euro. And other muslim countries which are not on the list like Turkey etc. are the places for Trump towers and businesses and hotels, and they are allies of the US by providing them military bases. Specifically Iran gives a lot of scientists to the world. Most Iranians running away from Iran are running away from the regime. They're educated and wish for better lives. Iran is one of the countries at the very bottom of the list. And this action against Iranians will definitely fuck up what Obama built as international ties with the nuke deal.

This kind of ban will definitely spread to other countries in the future, even maybe some from Eastern Europe. Then the US will have irreparable damage to the economy because the skilled workforce from these countries will go to Australia, Canada, Germany etc. In the short-term migrants or refugees may cost society some dollar but there are more than 10-15 studies showing from German economy as an example, in the long-term the economy flourishes thanks to immigrants.

Also americans need to wake up. This is not a ban of terrorists and this is not something which will prevent incidents like Sandy Hook elementary school etc. It fuels the hate. Now some people will come to me and tell me about 9/11, Boston bombings, San Bernardino, Orlando gay club attack etc. 9/11 terrorists were mostly from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, San Bernardino had Pakistani descent, Boston bombings led by Chechen brothers-basically Russians, Orlando shooter is from Afghanistan.

Im not American but support his decision for banning muslims. Even though not ALL muslims are terrorists, they are still out there amongst them and for now; the only thing we can do to stop terrorist attacks is to ban muslims. Its harsh, yes but I believe it shouldn't be a ongoing law. Strategies for differentiating between them should be formulated as an alternative while terrorist attacks are still ongoing. However Im completely against the idea of the law being a permanent solution for the situation.

I do also believe the same law should be applied to Australian borders. We know all too well about refugees and asylum seekers, we are an island that is vulnerable towards outsiders, including both flora and fauna. Anything that gets inside our borders thats dangerous we are permanently screwed over (e. g., lyme disease) so with that said; terrorists bomb Australia, claim it as their own; it becomes a perfect vantage point to use military weapons on both Asia and America since its within range. The youngest country on earth dies the earliest. But this is just a scenario; who knows what will happen 100 years from now, North Korea has been way too quiet for a long time.. and its anybodies guess what happens next.

@Iamgreat24 exactly what i think... so i am not the only one who is seeing this issue from a third party point of view but who agrees with Trump

u know, when u said about strategies to differentianting between terrorists or not, i think the best strategy to detect radical muslims is by offering them to eat bacon or pork. This way Christian and other religions refugees would pass easily, but radical muslim would refuse to eat that

@BronzedAdonis Yeah it was very rude but she was right. How else are we suppose to figure out the bad from the good? There aren't any alternatives and as said previously, its a harsh decision but should only be temporary until there are characteristics are are deemed "terrorist"

No it's unconstitutional. There are plenty of white people that have done terrible things like Ted Bundy. Should we ban white people? Absolutely not. All you "Christians" who support the ban, are hypocrites. Funny how the Bible is so important when a gay couple wants a cake, but the moment that desperate people need help, it's not referenced.

The orange-ish colors is where the ban is in place. The yellow is where the ban is not in place. Trump has business ties to the countries in yellow. That's a conflict of interest but Trump supporters would argue that it's a coincidence. Also, nobody from the orange-ish countries have killed a single American. However thousands of Americans have been killed by people in the yellow colored countries. www.bloomberg.com/.../...t-of-interest_twitter.png

0|1

0|0

Is this still revelant?

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

What Girls & Guys Said

This is the way I see the ban. It's like in school when your teacher would punish the whole class over the actions of a few students. Why punish the whole bunch when it's only a couple? it's not fair. I think it's only the few that cause a problem should be punished and those who have no part should be free to do as they please as long as they hurt nobody else which the majority are like that. Every religion and group has it's bad nuts. It's just better in my opinion that we weed out the bad nuts so that the good nuts can help contribute to society and be peaceful

"my opinion that we weed out the bad nuts so that the good nuts" - the purpose is to temporarily halt the flow of people until we can figure out a way to pick out the bad nuts from the good nuts. In your class analogy, what do you suggest a teacher do if one kid is constantly vandalizing the room but no one knows who's doing it? Is it terribly to say "no one gets to go to recess until we find out who did this"?

I DO SUPPORT. Finally someone with the guts to make the correct actions even if it sounds aggressive. Muslim immigration is crisis in today's world. Germany is leading the crisis. I am not racist. I am not disrespectful against any belief or region. But there are undeniable facts regarding Muslim immigrants. In the past two years here in U. S we lost thousand of people due terrorism. We don't want to be like Germany. Thus some serious actions are necessary.

People trying to make it sound like "what kind of a big deal it is" it is not. This order is not racist. It's not bad. There is nothing negative about it.It's not "Forever" but a "Temporary" phase. Between 90-120 days. Because we need to take a break and realize what the hell we want to do to prevent our citizens getting killed which Muslim immigrants always had a huge hand on it. Seven countries:Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. And Syrian refugees going through an "Extreme vetting" which is awesome and necessary and what make sense.

Those who are criticizing or those officials who trying negotiate with Trump about the decision, they should know:-When United States accept immigrants. It is a privilege not a duty. -Stop making it look like it's 100 hundred years deal. It's nothing but a temporary phase till we realize how we can solve the terrorism issue. The terrorism caused by immigration. So the "Constitution" is not vanished either. It's a temporary-Emergency call in the middle of the crisis. Just that.-Yes. There has been some aftermath for this decision, but we don't have anything such as a prefect choice. Every decision has cons and pros and some difficulties.-This decision is not racist. It is according to Muslim-Immigration factual stats.

The only thing we should wait for is to see what kind of program he will come up with after the deadline. So we could have a secure, healthy and clear immigration system. Because i believe whether we are going to discover an effective way to separate good and bad very well. Or we must ban it forever to protect our country and citizens. So i hope he is looking for an effective vetting and immigration law.

Two issues?First? Fuck celebrates who speak out against it. I don't give a single fuck what their opinion on it is. Why should the fact that, someone who gets paid millions of dollars to sing or speak other people's words, are offering the opinions, matter?They have the right to their opinion, and the right to express them, but something does not matter more because Mr. Fucking Sulu tweets about it.

Secondly? Even if I opposed it, strongly, that doesn't matter. Trump did not make up the right to ban entry to people. It is existing law:8 US code 1182Inadmissible Aliens(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Even if the ban is not needed, and bad policy, it is 100% within the authority of the president, according to existing law, and the courts that block this do so in direct violation of the law they swear to uphold.

it doesn't seem right, i mean, i understand in this day and age, at least one western nation was going to start turning isolationist, they're on the rise, but it's from a flawed level of thinking, this ban along with any other action from the US in a similar style is likely to make the strain on Europe greater, and probably start migration patterns going across other areas of the old world. it's also very discriminatory, how you can get away with just banning particular people and not others is beyond me, but i think it's quite likely ISIS and other terror groups won't start attacking the US, it's against their interest, and in fact, what trump is doing plays exactly into ISIS' and Al-Qaeda's hand's. it discriminates those people that they want, makes them desperate and unwanted in their own country, and forced to move to more extremes, like ISIS (their pattern of behavior suggests they see themselves as a Utopian society for Muslims). lastly, this is haunting, i live in a country which was peppered with bombs, leveling entire cities during the war, and my grandparents, holocaust survivors and the people i met at Auschwitz when i went to visit, would find it incredibly disturbing. it's very Nazi-esque, and although Trump's policies differ from Hitler in some areas, his outlying message remains the same, and i fear my country is growing too close for it's own good, and in fact, i fear for all countries in the world, because one of the biggest preachers of freedom and liberty has started violating it's own constitution.

A religion is not a race. It is a set of beliefs, specifically a set of beliefs admittedly based on faith, not reason. No religion deserves any respect, especially Islam.

The Holocaust was unleashed against certain people because of their genes. It did not matter to the National Socialists whether the victims professed the religion of Judaism or not, though of course many of them did because of the historical isolation of that people.

Ironically, many Muslim scholars claim that the 'Islamic' dress code is not in fact mandated by Islam but is a secular practice.

According to many Muslims, the Holocaust did not happen or was exaggerated or was brought by the Jews upon themselves. So, what's the worry?

There is a constant Islamic terrorist threat against the United States. And several Muslim-majority or constitutionally Islamic states have in fact been waging war against the United States for decades. Comparing this to the plight of the Jews is ridiculous.

And, by the way, Trump is not doing nearly enough. He is a wimp. He wants to 'make a deal' with Iran, and he is apparently completing ignoring the problem of Saudi Arabia. What America needs is not 'deals' or, for that matter, humanitarian intervention or 'nation-building'. It needs a war of principled, rational self-interest. Neither Iran or Saudi Arabia is comparable in power to Nazi Germany or imperial Japan. They would demolished in days.

All I heard from you was "bla, bla, bla, Muslims don't deserve respect". Unlike the radical athiest that you are, America can at least still say it respects faith even if it may not alway agree with it. This country was founded upon the freedom to practice religion, go fuck yourself please.

@FroggyDoggy96 Respecting freedom of religion does not require respecting religion. In fact, the founding fathers were the most anti-religious generation of politicians in America's history, and the United States' first overseas war was against the jihadis of the Barbary States.

Muslims don't need your respect, or neither does any other group of people for that matter. A radical in any field is too driven by emotion and not logic. By definition of the word radical which you proudly wear, you are a far reaching person. Just as you are with those whole situation.

'Radical' means 'consistent'. 'Moderate' Muslims are better than radical or consistent Muslims, because Islam is false. Atheism is true. Therefore radical or consistent atheism is better than 'moderate' atheism, whatever that would be.

Out of the many definitions of the word radical, I would be hard pressed to find one that defines it as "consistent". Meriam-Webster (please tell me you got out from under your rock long enough to know what that is) defines it as very unusual/extreme/advocating for extreme measures. That's more in line with what you're all about unusual and extreme ideas based far from a nice rational standpoint. Perhaps you lack the intelligence to know that you have to look at the definition of the word in this context (the one related to ideas on religion and politics). It's okay I forgive you, but I can't speak with you any further. You're just one of those emotionally radical atheists.

@FroggyDoggy96 'Extreme' what? It is a modifier. For example, I am consistently or extremely or indeed radically against murder. 'Extreme' is not in itself good or bad. Only an anti-conceptual mentality would say so.

Atheism is in fact rational. But, why should it matter to you if it weren't? You respect the religious, who proudly admit that they are rejecting reason! You are very confused.

@FroggyDoggy96 It's ironic that you call him emotional and illogical when he has made zero personal attacks and you told him go "fuck himself". That's not an argument, its an emotional outburst. He clearly has better control on his emotions than you, which isn't suprising seeing as he appears to be more rational and level headed. Unless you can provide sufficient evidence to support why the "muslim ban" is bad then we have no reason to see it as such. So far you've provided none.

This is how hate becomes more stronger towards the US. This isn't like poking a bear; it's like forcing to wake up a sleeping dangerous volcano. Once it erupts, there's no stopping it and destroys everything in it's path. Trump doesn't that this country is build off of immigrants. This is a country of mixed races, religions & cultures; that's what makes this country great. People leave their homes to come here for a better life; one where they achieve the goals they couldn't back home. How can we achieve world piece if we banned people from entering here? All he's doing is making more enemies. After this, what else is he gonna do that's gonna piss people off?

I have a friend who is an European citizen but when he was 8 he moved there from Iran so it means he's also an Iranian citizen. Although born muslim, he considers himself not muslim and even eats pork.

Because of this ban, he wouldn't be able to visit USA for even a vacation. He is not a criminal, no extreme opinions, he has a job.

How could you possibly think this is fair? It's clear that you who support this have gotten your opinions shaped by media and news, most likely you've no experience with actually dealing with "these people" because if you had, you'd realize they are individuals and not some hive mind collection of villains or whatever.

I am not American but I support him. I noticed there was no marching when Obama banned anyone from Iraq for 6 months. Also, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and the UAE have not taken in ONE SINGLE REFUGEE from Syria. NOT ONE SINGLE ONE. So, why all the marching against this Order from Trump? People are generally upset that he is now President and that he won with a slim majority. However, Muslims are creating huge problems around the world with their attitudes towards women and children, so much so, that Sweden is now the rape capital Europe and Rape Pants have been invented and are soon to be distributed around Europe. Trump is right and I wish England/Europe would have the guts to follow suit.

The First Amendment applies to citizens and those living with in the United States. It does not permanent residency to every citizen of the world. We don't make all of China United States citizens, why should we take in Syrians, Iraqis, or Iranians when they have their own countries and nationalities? They have their nations, and no other country in the world takes in mass amounts of people like the west does. It's senseless.

Still has nothing to do with immigration. We are not obligated to grant permanent residency to anyone, they have their countries. Not allowing people to travel to the United Stated from war zones doesn't violate the first amendment for any U. S citizen. Or the UNHR. Also, the U. S constitution is above the UNHR.

@RegularTK421 Even before 9/11 visa for the US were difficult to obtain. I tried to get a three month student entry in 1964. Denied without any reason. My son got one in 1993 without problems.I got tourist visa in 2000. A friend tried a few years ago: denied without any reason. No Muslims or Communists in the family. It's just the monkey handling the files who decides. Trump made it a tad worse.

We have Americans who are unemployed and our social services are strained and under funded as it is. We are not obligated to accept anyone, even if they are good people. Your family has a country and a citizenship.

"U. S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

@RegularTK421 A green card person, or a person on H1B work visa, or a student on F1 visa are legal residents (non-immigrant or immigrant visa status) of the United States. Banning them from re-entry is the ultimate bullshit.

@lyannamormont I think preserving lives is more important. I don't know about you, but having my limbs blown off due to some asshole in a suicide bomb vest doesn't sound appealing. I also don't want to get hit by a bus when I'm out drinking with my friends, or out at a Christmas market. It's only 7 war torn countries, no other Islamic nations were added to that ban. Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Indonesia, etc can all still obtain visas. It's only Syria, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Iran, etc. At this point it is only for 90 days, so it's a sensible move. We can extend it as necessary.

FDR also banned immigration from Germany and Japan prior to ww2, just fyi. He is considered one of the top presidents in U. S history. Trump hasn't done anything that hasn't been done before. The left just politicizes and exaggerates every little thing the man does. He's been in office for a handful of days.

@RegularTK421 what about white christian American school shooters? They are also spreading fear in the society and shall be called terrorists. But we rather use our hypocrisy and call them "mentally disturbed" people because of our white christian supremacy.

@RegularTK421 Last time I checked Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia were not "Islamic" countries but Islam majority countries. Protect yourselves from your own retarded white Christians first when you can't even ban saudi arabic people because you need them.

@RegularTK421 AS if I'd have gone to the US as student, just to rob your social services? You must be joking.Nobody is speaking here about permanent residency. (as was offered to as many Cubans as could get into Florida, just to spite Cuba.)It's about refuges, fleeing wars started by US governments. Their problem ends when the US govt REALLY stops its wars.

@RegularTK421 By the way, you have the lowest unemployment in history. Go thank Obama before Trump fucks it up and it raises.

Your Americans are unemployed because they dont do the dirty job, it is for Mexicans. They dont do the math related tech related jobs because they are not as competitive as indians or chinese or iranians or koreans. Maybe you should try to look at this from a clearner more objective point before talking about foreigners come and steal your jobs etc. Refugees do not come to steal your jobs. Neither talent based sponsored visas are given so easily without employers are proving that the person is skilled and no American can replace.

@jacquesvol That's true, but it was in competition with the Soviet Union. Many Nazi intelligence officials and scientists were recruited after the fall of ww2 Germany. Wernhner Von Braun being chief among them. He is considered the father of rocket science, and helped develop the V2 rocket in Germany, and the Saturn V for the United States. I can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing. If we had not done it, the Soviet Union would still be in existence and the United States would not be the nation that it is today.

I'm asking you, does casual or part time employment count as unemployed, or employed? In which decade did American citizens have the highest percentage of FULL time employment?

Aside from that, when did I ever say foreigners steal our jobs? Don't you put fucking words in my mouth. This nation accepts many migrants, more than most countries ever have. What nation are you from, and lets compare immigration statistics between the two. So we have to grant the entire world U. S citizenship on demand, because otherwise it is some sort of "white christian supremacy" bullshit you keep espousing. I'm honestly curious, what other country in the world accepts such high levels of immigration? Indonesia, Thailand, Namibia? Who? We have taken in Hmong, Mexicans, Latin Americans, Cubans, Haitians, Polish, Brazilians, Romanians, etc.

During the 1940s, the U. S Department of Labor, specifically the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), began collecting employment information via monthly household surveys. Other data series are available back to 1912. The unemployment rate has varied from as low as 1% during World War I to as high as 25% during the Great Depression. More recently, it reached peaks of 10.8% in November 1982 and 10.0% in October 2009. Unemployment tends to rise during recessions and fall during expansions. From 1948 to 2015, unemployment averaged about 5.8%. There is always some unemployment, with persons changing jobs and new entrants to the labor force searching for jobs. This is referred to as frictional unemployment. For this reason, the Federal Reserve targets the natural rate of unemployment or NAIRU, which was around 5% in 2015. A rate of unemployment below this level would be consistent with rising inflation in theory, as a shortage of workers would bid wages (and thus prices) upward.[20]

@RegularTK421 not only a few nazi scientists were hoisted to the US. Camp wardens too. by the way my two grandfathers and one grandmother were killed by von Brauns rockets. I don't know if it were V1 or V2.

@jacquesvol I mean during WW1 era. She was stating that Barack Obama gave us the lowest unemployment rate of all time. Frankly being unemployed is less of a concern than a full scale global war. I don't see how anyone could logically wish for ww3, especially since the advent of nuclear warheads and their proliferation. While the V2 rocket design could be used for war, it was also used extensively in the space industry.

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to people who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to count every unemployed person each month, the government conducts a monthly survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration program. In 1942, the U. S. Census Bureau took over responsibility for the CPS. The survey has been expanded and modified several times since then. In 1994, for instance, the CPS underwent a major redesign in order to computerize the interview process as well as to obtain more comprehensive and relevant information.

There are about 60,000 eligible households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals each month, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys, which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and independent cities in the country first are grouped into approximately 2,000 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample of about 800 of these geographic areas to represent each state and the District of Columbia. The sample is a state-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each state.

So they only survey approximately 110,000 citizens out of country of 324 million to determine the unemployment percentage. Also, you can be unemployed, but not counted as unemployed by the survey's own metrics.

Do you currently want a job, either full or part time? What is the main reason you were not looking for work during the last 4 weeks? Did you look for work at any time during the last 12 months? Last week, could you have started a job if one had been offered?

So if you do not want a job, have not looked for work, or refused to start a job then you are not counted as unemployed based on their survey. That 5 percent number is basically meaningless.

@jacquesvol How is it not useful information? She just bragged that Obama had the lowest unemployment rate in history. These numbers mean nothing, and even according to the BLS they had lower rates of unemployment throughout different time periods, making her statement false.

@jacquesvol Started by Barack Hussein Obama by executive order? Yes I agree. He started the war in Syria, Libya, and Ukraine. He also supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, a known terrorist organization.

@jacquesvol That poll doesn't mean anything. Polling 2000 people in select locations can obtain any result. The sample size of the population is too small in proportion to our population, 324 million. Trump has also only been in office for a few weeks, we can't really judge his performance or the effect of his policies until after 4 years in office.

I hate it. I hope the judiciary branch destroys it and congress brings trump to heel. It's unconstitutional AND it's illegal!

This whole situation makes me so ashamed of my country and the people supporting this atrocity. It's clearly not a terror ban since the countries it's blocking aren't even all of the countries with large terrorist issues like Pakistan and Turkey. But, oh, guess what? Those countries he didn't include are all doing business with him. What a coincidence! I guess if there's a trump brand in your country there's no terrorists.

This is not a muslim ban... It's a travel ban on people from 7 countries that are mostly muslim. Christians/Atheists from these countries have been turned away just like their muslim countrymen. That being said this travel ban SUCKS ASS. First, all these executive orders are UNAMERICAN. If you hated it when Bush or Obama were abusing their power you should hate it just as much as when Trump does it. Also our vetting program is the best and most rigorous in the world. All this ban does is erode goodwill towards us in the world and gives ammo to islamist recruiters. It's fucking ridiculous and above all it's un-American. We should welcome qualified and legal refugees and immigrants to this country. Plus it doesn't include the islamist hotbeds of Egypt and KSA or even fucking Pakistan. This is pointlessly divisive and should be removed immediately.

Well it's not really a muslim ban, is it?He banned people from some countries, mostly countries you are currently at war with are have been in the recent past.

Do I think it's the best course of action? No! But I also don't think it's quite comparable to jews in Nazi Germany and I think those hysterical Hitler comparisons need to stop. In some ways I think yes Trump acts a lot of like Hitler in the early 30s. Or I don't know pick another dictator but enforcing a temporary immigration stop from countries you're at war with is not comparable to the Holocaust at all. I also think we should stop calling it a muslim ban

Trump gets the job done. He made the American people a promise and he is standing by his word. I was hurt when I see those refugees being detained, but its something that other countries need to fix. That should fall solely on Trump nor the American people. Yes... I am sorry that in other countries they are treated horrible and do not have access to the things that we have here. But the government should do something that then. Trump is doing the duties of his job, and that his to keep America safe from harm. I know a lot of people are hurt and sad. But other countries are not quick to let us in also. I remember watching the News a few years back and seeing reporters from the US getting their head cut off from just being an American. We are quick to take them in but those other countries do not do the same for us.

It is not just a muslim ban. However I agree with it. The UN is not fighting an army. It is fighting terrorist civilians. We have no way of knowing people's intentions. There is also a lot of brain washing going on by muslim extremists in those areas. While it might not help much. I think it is a good preventative measure. It will work better than the security measures in airports. All they do is make it a pain to fly.

Muslims are killing civilians left a right in those countries. Why should we not block them from coming over here and using being a refugee as an excuse to be able to operate on us soil.

this is a good preventative measure, even though it's not the best of all solutions it still works for national security at USA soil. However i need to add, than a muslim ban would be better because then Christian refugees (who obviously are not dangerous for USA) could come in here too

@KnightCross That I agree with because in those countries the Christians are being brutally murdered. While being filmed and then those are sickingly enough being broadcast and uploaded onto the internet.

oh finally somebody who undestands me :) Christians are the ones who are suffering more in the middle east because besides collateral damage of wars, they are still tortured and brutally killed by ISIS...

its not a true muslim ban as he hasn't specifically banned Muslims from entering the US for the next 90 days , the ban does target 7 deeply troubled countries which have large muslim populations and for which there has been travel advisories and restrictions in place in the past.

I often think people forget just how much more dangerous that part of the world is now than it was 10 or 20 years ago , countries like Syria were once a nice place to visit but have been at war for several years now and very unsafe , the rise of ISIS has also made that part of the world more dangerous

The problem I have with it is that it does not include people from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Palestine, Afghanistan, or Chechnya.

The US government has to be right in its screening 100% of the time, but a terrorist only has to get past once to kill people.

A few hours ago I read a list of terrorist attacks in the US, trying to show that that most of the attacks were by people from some other than those 7 countries. But it also showed that 98.8% of the people killed in those terrorist attacks were killed by Moslems. Considering they make up only about 2% of the US population, that is astonishing.

What we have done in the past is not good enough. Terrorists are getting in, and Europe has it worse. We need to stop what we are doing and come up with a new approach.

I have mixed feelings about this. I mean there's probably a 0.00000000001% chance that someone you're letting into the country is a terrorist but what if that chance happened and countless lives are lost? I can see why the ban would be in place.

But at the same time, it's so wrong to exclude a whole group of people based on the actions of the very few.

I don't know, I feel like there must be a better way of dealing with this without having a ban.

I also feel like trump is going to somehow start WW3 and we are all going to have to suffer the consequences. Hate isn't the solution.

I voted C even though I don't fully understand the meaning behind setting some fixed days/ months before being able to reenter the country...

"a Muslim immigrant with a legal green card, you cannot reenter the US for 90 days should you choose to leave. It doesn't matter if you are visiting family, attending a funeral, going on vacation, or even going on a business trip. Refugees cannot enter the United States for 120 days."

This ban does nothing. If he wanted to stop ISIS he would have banned Russia, Saudi Arabia, etc. But he's all buddy buddy with them because his money comes first.The countries he banned are mostly not a threat to us at all.

At the end of the day, look at it this waySomeone is going to die either way --> they will either kill native muslims at home OR kill and terrorize others around the globe

--> the key to beating them, which by the way Isis was created by USA first hand, is to contain them and keep them within predictable boundaries --> another way to look at it is... if we ever want to win this fight in the future some tuff decisions have to be made today in order to implement a real plan in the future--> the fact that Trump is boldly acknowledging the situation with immediate steps, is a good sign for things to come within this respect. He is basically doing what others couldn't --> which is actually protect the Americans and win this battle that the whitehouse so created in the first place

Well I am not American, but I support Trump to ban countries like Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan at least because every body knows a lot of terror organizations were founded in these lands so especially during these few years world needs to protect itself against them more. So Trump banned them because he didn't want ISIS/Taliban shit in his country.

Also most of people from those countries don't obey the lifestyle in country they just migrated, they still wear their stupid black hijabs, don't learn the local language and annoy the local people. Honestly I'd want my government to do the same but they don't lol.

Ahh, so you're another idiot who doesn't realize that it takes time for people to adjust to the new country they moved into. Because if you moved to a foreign country, you would be dressing, speaking, and acting exactly how they would like in a matter of weeks right? fuck off mate

@FroggyDoggy96 So you are the another idiot who doesn't give a fuck about his culture and language going into a dust huh? You don't know about these "minotories" bruh my country had minotories like 600 years and we still have. Do you know why our Empire was destroyed? That was because we had a lot of minotories and they rebelled against us, they didn't want to live using our language anymore, our clothes, our alphabet and our flag. They didn't want to use any of them, they wanted their own things in my country and it resulted with them getting their independence. What do you want? Watching how your country gets divided from them?

If I move to some country for sure I'll live however they want because that means "its their country, their lands, their rules" I'd obey the life there and thats how needs to he done. If u don't want to obey their life then why the fuck u migrate to their country and annoy them?

While I don't agree with immigrants forcefully imposing their culture on others (mind you, aside from extremists which are a very tiny minority of refugees, refugees really just don't do this), I see nothing wrong if a culture changes over time because of them. America is a melting pot and always has been. It's not about the white supremacists who were a good chunk of Trump's supporters, it's about them and everybody. I don't know if you believe in evolution, but the mixing of cultures is the evolution of society. You can hold on to values of your culture (by the way America is founded on a history of Native American, Hispanic, and Black slaughter/slavery - so technically this culture did exactly what you are afraid the refugees MIGHT do), but you cannot constitutionally/ethically bar people out of the "land of the free" simply because you are afraid that in time their culture will supersede your own. It's fair and square.

You are aware that there's a thing we have in the US called a constitution, right? And that actually there is something we can do about, and there is something being done about it. The ACLU has already gotten a federal judge to a stay against the executive order, and are doing plenty more to stop it entirely. Like, sorry to break it to you, but the US is not in fact a dictatorship, not yet anyhow.

Lmao buddy being patronizing ain't gonna make me go away, it's just gonna make you look fucking dumb. I know more about the constitution and probably political mechanisms as a whole than you ever will, judging by the astounding ignorance you're displaying here. Our government isn't a dictatorship. There's all sorts of mechanisms in place to prevent that, and if you honestly think those have no import whatsoever just because we have a republican President and Congress, and one open seat on the SCOTUS that was previously already filled by a far-right dipshit, you've got another fucking thing coming.

@cipher42 Go away? I keep saying keep it up, why would you think I want you to go away?

Look, you think you know things, much less more than a college graduate over a decade your senior who's been to more countries than you've had birthday by well over double, been to combat, actually worked within the government, and currently works a highly federally regulated job... and that is SERIOUSLY entertaining to me, so no, please, do not go away. You keep doing this. This is great.

My dog, but you are all so dense. This kind of crap is what got you Trump. You all keep it up. Signs, highway blocking protests, vagina marches, whatever. Just keep it up so we can stay majority in 2 years and keep the White House next election.

I actually have basic reading comprehension skills buddy, I ain't as dumb as you.

And I pretty clearly do know more than you, in this particular area in any case. But y'know, it's pretty darn adorable that you think being older than someone automatically makes you smarter than them. Fun fact, that's basically just an ad hominem argument you've got right there, and as we all know (or at least as those of us with functioning brains know) that's not actually a valid argument. So sorry honey, no amount of patronizing bullshit and non-arguments are gonna convince me, or anyone who knows how to reason.

And my age was one of among many things I listed. Hmmm... Selecting one bit of an argument to attack and ignoring the rest... That like.. another of those logical fallacy doohickies... Which I for totes sure you know the original Latin for like you know the one for strawman to. I know it's not fair, I've forgotten more languages than I currently and most people can speak, but put on your try hard hat!

I mean I could, but why should I? Because you want me to? Cute, but nah.

And I focus on that because that's the part that's most fallacious? The rest of what you said doesn't make you any smarter either. Your personal "experience" don't mean shit to me considering that your actual opinions are so blatantly idiotic. Like unless your job is literally knowing about the federal government, I don't give shit what it is, and even if it were it's not like I have any reason to actually trust what you say.

Basically, your positions are politically ignorant horseshit, and no amount of claimed "experience" is gonna change that. Anyhow, I don't think this conversation is particularly productive, since you haven't actually given any reasoned out explanation as for why your position is any less than complete garbage, and since I expect you're just gonna continue with the fallacies and the patronizing bullshit, I don't see a reason to entertain your idiocy any longer.

Meh, whatever buddy. Tbh you seem to be a bit more riled up about this than me. Does being condescending make you feel better about your sad little life then? You do you I guess, just don't think that you're actually convincing anybody with that little act of yours. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@cipher42 Aw shit. You got me. It's all a facade. I'm not ecstatic about liberal anguish. In fact, this compensation for my small penis.

Weren't you like, done with this conversation? Don't get me wrong, I'm tickled you're still playing. I mean, I have to retract my adorable remark now that I've seen your face, but still, you're extremely entertaining.

Oh I am. I'm done with the actual conversation part, that's too much effort for not enough actual substance from you. It was all just you slinging dumb insults to try and distract from the actual topic anyhow, so I figured it'd be easier to drop the pretense and just do this the easy way. Also, the fake-amusedness is cute and all (see how I used it there?) but it's honestly getting kinda old. Can you maybe come up with a more original way to insult me?

@cipher42 Oh, sorry. Couldn't tell. From the perspective of someone with valid facts instead of useless opinions based on nothing, you could easily understand how when one of your ilk is "done" with the conversation is indecipherable from when you're continuing it among the actually intelligent.

Well, if you had any valid facts whatsoever you sure as fuck didn't provide them. And if you were actually intelligent, you would have been interesting to talk to. But you're not. The only way you seem to know to argue is through condescension and insults, or that's certainly the impression I've gotten so far. Like, you think one Supreme Court seat being filled by a conservative (when that seat was filled by a conservative already anyways) makes for a majority and allows the President as much power as he likes. Anyone who understands high school level civics can tell you that's idiotic and unrealistic. Whatever tho, you've already shown you're not capable of understanding anything that complex.

@Chipher42 Darling, "Lmao buddy being patronizing ain't gonna make me go away, it's just gonna make you look fucking dumb. I know more about the constitution and probably political mechanisms as a whole than you ever will, judging by the astounding ignorance you're displaying here. Our government isn't a dictatorship. There's all sorts of mechanisms in place to prevent that, and if you honestly think those have no import whatsoever just because we have a republican President and Congress, and one open seat on the SCOTUS that was previously already filled by a far-right dipshit, you've got another fucking thing coming."

That was definitely the first punch. Especially with the hostile turn with all the cursing.

You honestly think that wasn't an insult? Or do you think he insulted you before that?

@xxAjjxx: are you actually stupid? Did you not read the comment I was replying to with that? He was being patronizing and insulting, and I decided to give as good as I get. Like I said, he decided he didn't want a rational conversation, I went with it.

@xxAjjxx Ha, thus why I don't cook. That and I don't have the time or effort necessary. And I for one find that college is both a lot of fun and provides a lot of learning. It does depend on your particular personality and values of course, but certainly for me it's a worthwhile experience.

@xxAjjxx yeah, it is, most of the time anyhow. Some colleges do give pretty good financial aid, but even then it can be expensive. Im pretty privileged in that my parents are covering the costs that financial aid doesn't, so for me it's totally worth it, but for those who actually do have more financial issues its definitely not as simple a decision.

He doesn't hate Muslims. He's doing background checks to a new standard on high risk countries in order to try to protect US lives. I don't think this is relatable to what happened to Jews in WW2. He thinks of his priority to protect the American people first which I find reasonable and understandable. Historically that has really been the number one job of presidents. He's just not worried about offending the US extremists.

While you can't ban a race you can increase control on who comes in. Eisenhower did it during his administration and it worked pretty well. I think banning an entire race or culture is stupid, but i do agree with not allowing refugees in. The legal people living here can still get in and out if I'm not mistaken.

For 120 days, the order bars the entry of any refugee who is awaiting resettlement in the U. S. It also prohibits all Syrian refugees from entering the U. S. until further notice. Additionally, it bans the citizens of seven countries—Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and Yemen—from entering the U. S. on any visa category.

The Trump order is nothing close to approaching a ban on Muslims. It affects anyone of any religion from those seven countries. These seven countries represent a small percentage of Muslims worldwide and the order is temporary, 90=120 days. It is utter ridiculousness to call it a ban on muslims. When 1+1=3, this will be a ban on muslims.

And in general, i support Trump's order but i would not support a ban on muslims. I dont like the way it was implemented, but its better than doing nothing.

When the vast majority of the people of these countries are Muslim, how is it not a banning of Muslims? Perhaps you don't recall that they used to have literacy requirements to keep black people from voting in America. God, there are so many of you simpletons out there.

Ok, well if you want to get down to brass tacks, since you seem to love simplicity... or at least over simplifying to a level you can understand. The order bans a small portion of Muslims, of the total population of Muslims on earth. It also bans Christians, Yazidis, Jews, Yarsan and Shabak that originate from these seven countries. It does not ban Muslims from other countries, therefore the statement that it "bans muslims" is incomplete and therefore inaccurate. I hope that this isn't to complicated for you to understand. Like i said before 1+1 does not equal 3. You must have the complete number sentence to make it accurate. If the answer is 3, then you must have 1+1+1. It seems like you think that there aren't other people in those countries and that you also think that there are no muslims in countries other than those seven. I wonder, what could be your motivation to overlook these simple facts, is it just a simple oversight, or is there something else to it?

It seems you are way too technical which clouds your understanding. Although this is hurting the minority percentage of non-Muslims from those countries as well, the public who is against this policy is addressing it as a ban on Muslims because it is clearly and disproportionately affecting Muslims as opposed to any other religion. Like I said, although the voter laws that required passing a test prohibited non-blacks as well, it was designed primarily to deny blacks the ability to vote. Which is why the majority of the people who couldn't vote before we corrected those laws were black, similar to how Muslims are the vast majority of people who are being fucked by this law. Surely you aren't so dense that you understand that. Not everything will be written out for you on a piece of paper, sometimes u have to take your head out of your ass and see things for what they are (mind you "the way things are" are proven by the statistical evidence that Muslims are being fucked overwhelmingly)

@FroggyDoggy96 Well, im sorry that the technicality of the details is to complicated for you to grasp and manage all at one time... Interesting that you seem to think that minority populations are irrelevant and that disagreement with a policy warrants overlooking key information to forward a political message. Obama felt the same way too. As a matter of fact, when Obama began allowing transfer of Syrian refugees into the US, he expressly allowed 99.5% Muslim refugees whilst the Christian and Yazidi population of the country is over 10%. I wonder if it's related to their religion that they don't matter, or if it's just that there is an over focus on the majority that warrants pushing aside the minority people of a country.

@FroggyDoggy96"Statement Regarding Recent Executive Order Concerning Extreme Vetting“America is a proud nation of immigrants and we will continue to show compassion to those fleeing oppression, but we will do so while protecting our own citizens and border. America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave.We will keep it free and keep it safe, as the media knows, but refuses to say. My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the Executive Order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror. To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting.This is not about religion - this is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order. We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we

We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days.I have tremendous feeling for the people involved in this horrific humanitarian crisis in Syria. My first priority will always be to protect and serve our country, but as President I will find ways to help all those who are suffering.”"

It's not that the technicality bothers me, it's just that it's clouding your ability to see that the vast, vast majority of people that are being fucked here; are Muslim. I never said the minority non-Muslims don't matter, they sure as hell do. The reality of human beings is that if there is a huge group of people getting fucked over at a certain point and time, we allocate our resources to them before the small minority. In this case however, although I do believe it would be better if the non-Muslims received representation, getting rid of this ban would ultimately help them as well. But being that you support the ban in the first place, I don't find it surprising how you are now doing a full 180 and asking me to care for the non-Muslims from these banned countries as well.

@FroggyDoggy96 It seems like you have a difficult time with reading comprehension, so let me help you. I never asked you to care for anyone. I'm merely pointing out how you overlook important factors of an issue to forward an erroneous message and then you equivocate and say that they do matter, so long as it doesn't undercut the message you would like delivered. But an accurate story ie "Trump's restrictions affect mostly Muslims" is a facepalm level kind of story... it's a no shit sherlock moment because to no one's surprise the insurgent zone... defined by the Obama administration by the way, are all within Muslim majority countries... dooooohhhhh. Guess what? Isis is not running rampant in Japan! Captain Obvious isn't gonna get very far with that story if he's working as a journalist is he? So it comes out as "Trump Implements Muslim ban", which is just tripe... even you know to set asde the details because it doesn't help with the message that you like.

Let me try this once again because you seem to have quite a thick skull between your shoulders. I'll rephrase and restate for you; although this ban does affect the minority of non-Muslims, it is also a ban on the majority of Muslims in the countries in question. Your statement, "He didn't ban Muslims", is disproved by tens upon tens of thousand of Muslims that are now banned. If you want to be fucking technical, so can I.

if you wanna get technical with me you better damn well do it right cuz so far you have missed every pitch thrown. The statement is incomplete and therefore inaccurate. He didn't have a "Muslim Ban" he restricted muslims and others. You fool no one with your weak minded nonsense. Come back when you can talk with a clear mind.

You said ver-fucking-batim: "He didn't ban muslims." Not only technically, but factually, he did. Your screws are loose. I'm done here. One last thing, it's easy for you to be a keyboard warrior stating all the erroneous and false (see first sentence of this post) things you have said. Try putting your feet in the shoes of an innocent 32 year old female (I can't even say Muslim at this point because you would start typing away) just trying to get her family out of imminent death and into refuge. Don't bother, that was a rhetorical suggestion. You and I both know your head is so far up you ass that such a task is incapable for you.

So now you're picking straws between the immense "restrictions" he has laid down and banning? Wow, way to really scrape the bottom of the barrel. You know, for a 32 year old woman, you're not the brightest crayon in the box.

@FroggyDoggy96 ohh ffs cn you not read 1+1 does not = 3... in order for it to be correct, you have to have all elements... i cannot mke it more simple for you than this. If you can't understand that, then really you have no business here talking about it.

He banned muslims and christians and yazidis.

Ofc you are going to say... He banned muslims!!! Like, really no fucking shit sherlock.. It's fucking obvious... there is not one person on earth that can read that would think, he restricted travel from Syria, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Sudan and think... Ohh My God !!! He restricted travel by Mormons! Its a fucking moronic explanation for question titled "Trump's Muslim Ban" ... Really, give it up, you can keep on talking and talking it changes nothing... at it's best moment its a stupid error at it's worse its a deliberate mis-characterization of the travel restrictions. If you don't have anything more significant to say, then i am done here. Good night.

So let me get this straight; initially, you stated: "He didn't ban muslims.". Now, you are saying: "HE BANNED MUSLIMS christians and yazidis".You're just hanging yourself with your own rope at this point.

Lol, how insane is it that people are thinking that muslims are all terrorists. I think you should think again, I am a muslim, and it doesn't mean that I am a terrorist. People are just blaming muslims for no reason, stereotypes have blown away your mind, think again.

@Pinky26 oh so u are a muslim? i guess you are a lukewarm muslim then since they are the only ones who don't do the jihad... all the "good muslims" are the ones who either do or support jihad... do u know david woods btw? he exposes islam how it really is!

Lol do you even have any ideas about Islam or are you just talking? You made me laugh really, because not all Muslims do the jihad and not all Muslims are terrorists and terrorism has nothing to do with religion, there are israelian terrorists and christian terrorists so will you say that all israelian are terrorists or the christians are terrorists? Please do your researches and make sure not to judge everyone based on their religion.

@Pinky26 lol don't u know how to interpret a single paragraph? i have never said that all muslims are terrorists... i said that all "good muslims", that is, muslims who really do everything written in the Quran, all they support the implantation of Sharia Law which is what ISIS for instance is trying to do! again, do u know the teaching of ur own religion? i guess not

All terrorists are Muslim but not all Muslims are terroists so unfortunately they get lumped in with the few bad ones. It's just like when we were in school and one bad kid gets the whole class in trouble. So I this a temporary fix for the moment on what he is trying to do

I hate to tell you this good sir, but terrorist organizations come in all kinds of agendas, colors, demographics and nationalities. Like the Irish Republican Army, Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, Ku Klux Klan, Black Israelites, FARC (From colombia) and many more who are not Muslim or Arabic. It is just that those groups I mentioned are in countries we as a nation do not have a lot of interest (FARC, IRA) in or they are so broken up they cannot organize large scale actions like they used too (KKK, ALF)

Yea but they haven't caused an international crisis anything like the Muslim Isis terrorists have. And they haven't promised more attacks on the u. s. as Isis has... Please tell me you understand this difference

@spoonman2014 well that's true, I was just thinking about the ones from the countries that have been banned. There would be no way of banning all types, and most of those stay where they are and terrorize in their own country

So how come Turkey,, Tunisia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonseia and Central Asia countries wasn't banned? But they banned Iran which haven't even attacked the western countries.

Tunisia wasn't banned but yet has the highest numbers of ISIS fighters coming from that country including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Lebenon, Indonesia. Pakistan is known to have terrorist sympathisers. There is also thousands of Central Asian terrorist fighters.

lol its funny that majority women voted not supporting the ban, while guys support the Ban.

I fully support the ban, and by the way the ban is not on Muslims, it is on certain countries with overly active terrorist activities going on in them. Get your facts straight and stop thinking emotionally like majority people who don't support the ban.

You're apparently as stupid as Donald Trump. He hasn't banned Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Lebenon, Turkey, Central Asian countries, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Indonesia which known to have thousands of terrorists coming from these countries. But yet he fucking banned Iran which hasn't attacked western countries for a long time.

The countries that have been temporarily restricted are nations identified by the Obama administration as potential terrorist infiltration area. This is no different than the restrictions Obama set in place in his first and second terms, and in fact shorter than the six month restriction Obama set into place in 2011 and 2013.

Well It's not a muslim ban, I don't think it targetted specific faiths, I am not that opposed to the ban it's for 120 days I hope it allows for them to figure out how to deal with it. I do disagree with the green card thing where they can't come back (again not just muslims) that is actually kind of bollocks and has to be against some declaration.

Just like Obama, Trump has the right for national security sake to issue these bans! Obama banned Iraq citizens for his first six months of office from entering the US and if only these protestors knew that then maybe they would understand that executive orders are something you have to deal with! Honestly the less violent muslims the better until a proper protocol can be put in place to vet every single one of them because we do not need more violence in our country from foreigners

I believe that everything we can possibly due to prevent any more acts of terrorism in our country. If it puts a temporary hardship on those from the countries primarily where the terrorists are coming from then so be it. It is 120 days to figure out a more perfect way to prevent undesirables to enter and cause havoc here. Better safe than sorry after another 9/11, Boston marathon or other tragedies from recent times both within and outside the US.

US government used nuclear weapon in world war 2 and killed 200000 innocent people and we, muslims, are terrorists? ... heh... we have terrible muslims in our religion but is it our problem? hitler is muslim too? we have terrorists in the world.. so he should ban all countries and some americans too... ALL OF THEM IS POLITICS... They fool us... They tell u to hate Muslims... we don't have any fighting rules in our religion... we just have defence rules... my religion is about loving each other and god... please please please believe me : these are just politics... they dont care about safety... why isn't Saudi Arabia in the list... believe me

well i think they should have background checks and screening before they enter the country. I will be honest, i don't know any muslims so i don't know that much about their religion... I think just like anywhere there are good muslims and there are a few bad ones... I think he is just trying to make share the wrong ones aren't getting in.

They already have that! And if they're refugees they're checked by at least four different agencies, multiple departments, AND they're interviewed several times. We literally only accept the top 1% of applicants.

it's too hard to do a background check to each single refugee... and even if u do so, there is no guarantee that that info is accurate and true... so the easiest way is to allow only Christians to come in, then for sure there is no risk they would end up blowing up next ur home

It has merits, but it's not been thought through and rushed, which is par for the course with him. Nobody actually knows how to interprete it, because it's not been thought out and definitions clarified. Some judges have overturned parts of it already lol.

There's nothing wrong with stringent vetting, but this is what happens when you blanket ban "people".

>It's not news that Muslims, since the start of the Trump and Clinton election campaigns, have been subjected to various forms of racism in American such as pulling off female hijabs and public scrutiny.

Except Islam isn't a race, plus a lot of those so called incidents have already been proven to be fake.

I'm not American and I wholeheartedly support the ban.Four of the countries are countries with ISIS presence or allegiance, two are Muslim majority countries that are one of the most dangerous places on earth currently affected by civil wars and armed conflicts and the last one (Iran) is an anti-American country with a history of hostility towards the US.

They have their own countries and citizenships. We are not obligated to allow any foreign national into our country. Not to mention we already have 319 million people, significant unemployment, and our social services are strained and underfunded as it is. We need to take care of Americans here first, then worry about the rest of the world.

I always find it funny when Americans such as yourselves say they have their own countries, but often the reason their countries are as fucked up as they currently are is because of U. S interference. For example, and this is by Trump's own admission, ISIS was created by the U. S. ISIS is now killing the people over there, but stay the fuck out of murica right?

@FroggyDoggy96 Barack Hussein Obama ordered bombing campaigns in Syria and Libya by executive order. He has also armed Sunni insurgents through out the entire Syrian civil war. You can blame the nobel peace prize winning president. ISIS never even existed until we were well into the Obama administration. I've said for years we should stop arming Sunni insurgents, and allow the Syrian government to regain control of Syria.

I never said Obama wasn't at fault. I was just saying this commenters idea to tell refugees to fuck off because they have their own countries is dumb because of what you just said, WE FUCKING CREATED THE PROBLEM THEY HAVE: ISIS.

@FroggyDoggy96 We should stop sending weapons to the middle east. We should not be involved in the middle east. Guess which president has mentioned both of these common sense ideas? That would be Trump. Secondly, importing massive amounts of people from a war torn country with little documentation and non existent back round checks, doesn't protect Americans. The President and our congress are elected on behalf of Americans, to protect our nation, our economy, and our way of life. Europe has already experienced an increase in both crime, and terrorist attacks by importing 1.5 million people all across the middle east and north africa.

I thought it was interesting that Egypt and Saudi Arabia weren't on the list of countries. Didn't the 9/11 terrorist comes from there?

If it's temporary until they figure out a better way to vet people, them I'm for it although it does present a hardship for some people. So maybe if those in hardship can present a solid case as to why they're not a threat, then it would be acceptable for now. JMO

@skeptic002 I am aware that there is a shit ton of bullshit surrounding 9/11 and what the government said about it but I dont think that makes it proof the government did it. I think it is certainly possible, maybe even likely but I wouldn't make conclusions without any solid evidence. But then again thats what conspiracies are, not that all of them are wrong.

@skeptic002 bad troll. Im not mad I was just telling you to fuck off with your bullshit beliefs with literally all facts and evidence against it. You can literally see the curvature of the earth at sea. There was a very large cruise liner sailing near my batch on the beach, and guess what, we couldnt see it because it was covered by the earths curvature. Dont try and troll people, its just sad.

I want you to explain this From Genoa, Italy 70 feet above sea-level, the island of Capraia 102 miles away can often be seen as well. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Capraia should always remain hidden behind 5,605 feet, over a mile of supposed curvature.1.bp.blogspot.com/.../corsica.jpg

@skeptic002 dude the meme is dead. If the earth wants to follow all known laws of physics it must be spherical. Do you know what would happen if the earth was flat? The centre would be flat but as you move further and further out the gravity would begin to tilt, at the end the gravity would be perpindicular. In order for the gravity to be roughly equal around the earth the earth must be a sphere, its literally the only way it can be. Unless you think gravity is fake which it clearly isn't just from observation. A sphere is literally the only geometric shape the earth can have in order for the gravity to be equal. No amount of bullshit can prove logic and maths wrong. Literally nothing. Logic and maths is pure truth you can't bullshit about there being a flat earth.

I support it, and it is not a Muslim ban it is an immigration ban. If it was really a Muslim ban he would have banned immigration from the entire Middle East. Obama Temporary banned immigration in Iraq one time so why is this a big deal? There are some very bad people in these countries who want to kill us and our way of life. We can't take any chance we must protect ourselves and our families.

no i'm not and I'm glad the courts and our government outside of the west wing are working hard to fight this order. i'm glad people exercised peaceful protests all over the country to show their dissatisfaction. I'm glad other leaders in countries all over the world (Including Vladimir Putin) have reached out to the oval office to question these decisions

I'm an American and I support it. It is not a Muslim ban though. He did not ban literally all Muslims worldwide from entering the U. S. I don't see why everyone is against it. There have been many murders and rapes by Muslims and the Quran itself, in plain language, says to kill and wage war against nonbelievers. Besides, if you aren't already from here you are not entitled to be a citizen. Also, it's temporary. I think people are just severely misguided and refuse to see this issue rationally.

Exactly! and some people reacting like it's America's duty to let everyone in. It's part of our constitution for sure! but doesn't mean we don't even have a right to stop it temporarily till we realize how we can do it more safely? gimme a break people!

Donald trump is an ally to extremist groups everywhere. He's literally gift wrapping their propaganda for them, not to mention rejecting innocents refugees fleeing for their lives.

I hope that one day he is in desperate situation but is denied a place to go and then just before he starves to death, I want someone to remind him of all the people he rejected because of his prejudice.

Yes it's right and the government has the right. People don't care what privileged celebrities think.. it's not like they have anything to lose or are willing to open up their mansions to refugees. Muslim citizens have no problem. As for the Nazis remember Jewish leaders were against Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany and worked to prevent it

His approach to radical Islam is the correct one. He wants to keep the people of The United States of America safe. The EU should have adopted this policy instead of lowering borders for free travel and wide open for terrorists and rapists.

What about keeping muslims safe? Or the rest of the world? Fuck, if we didn't have america we probably wouldn't even have islamic terrorism. Terrorism isn't a threat. You are over 4 times more likely to die of a lightning strike. The eu, especially germany handled the problem the way it should be handled. I honestly can't follow your logic.

"The eu, especially germany handled the problem the way it should be handled."

By allowing rape and sex crimes to increase drastically against local women? Yep, sounds like Germany has all things covered, don't worry. And then you also have Sweden, which has the highest sexual assault rate in Europe due to mass Islamic immigration. I'm sure they have it handled too.

You really can't compare sweden at all because they have completely overhauled their definitions of rape multiple timesover the past few years. Its not terrorist apologetic you idiot, its not about the terrorists, its about the muslims. you're just so narrow minded you can't even accept that muslims are 1. Not even the largest cause of terrorism 2. Much less than 1% are actually terrorists. The moment when you reslise that jihad is the defense of islam will be the moment you figure out how to stop and prevent islamic terrorism.

@oaknugginsBullshit. More like you only think it is "overhauled" because it doesn't your agenda that protects the Muslim rapefugees from facing criticism for inappropriately touching young women and being a threat to western societies.

I'm glad to be narrow-minded. Look what "open mindness" done to Europe, so yes it is about terrorism you imbecile. And just because not all Muslims are terrorists, doesn't mean that Islamic terrorism is not an issue that you can just shrug off. It's a bigger threat then you think if you actually go and educate yourself on the effects of Islamic immigration to the west and not have your head stuck in mainstream media sources. I'm sure ISIS would love your way of thinking.

funny thing to me is he never named the seven countries in the new bill. only refered to the 'States of Consern' as labled in the TTP act. everyone seems to think he just sort of picked a few countries he didn't like out of thin air.

they are named, but not in the new document, rather referenced from one passed durring the previous administration. All i'm saying is Trump didn't hand-pick these countries they were already on a 'watch list' if you will.

He torned families apart and crushed dreams of a lot of people , they had a chance to start over like a normal human being in another country because their country is being BOMBED BY THE AMERICANS THEMSELVES , america is starting to fall with a president with limited intelligence

My problem is that liberals want the government to pay for the refugees so that they look altruistic and superior. What I would like is let the Syrians come on and the people who want them here will open their homes to them because they are so selfless. But in the end, I don't care if it happens or not.

As said by some it is NOT a Muslim Ban. Read the order. Some news organizations are NOT telling the truth or use fake news to call it a Muslim Ban. So your Questionnaire is asking for answers to something that is NOT true. It's a bogus question.